Katarzyna Filutowska* Schelling s Narrative Philosophy and ...
COSMO General Meeting Zurich, 2005 Institute of Meteorology and Water Management Warsaw, Poland- 1 -...
-
Upload
darren-pitts -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
1
Transcript of COSMO General Meeting Zurich, 2005 Institute of Meteorology and Water Management Warsaw, Poland- 1 -...
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 1 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Verification of the LM at IMGW
Katarzyna Starosta, Joanna Linkowska, Andrzej Mazur
Institute of Meteorology and Water Management
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 2 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Contents:
Verification of surface parameters using 56 SYNOP stations
Verification of precipitation using 308 rain gauges
Verification of upper-air parameters using 3 TEMP stations.
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 3 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Verification of surface parameters using 56 SYNOP stations
Katarzyna Starosta, Joanna Linkowska
Institute of Meteorology and Water Management, Poland
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 4 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
• The results of verification surface continuous parameters from January 2005 to June 2005 will be presented. Following meteorological elements were analysed: 2m temperature, 2m dew point temperature, sea level pressure, 10m wind speed.
• The meteorological variables forecasted by the model were compared with synoptic data from 56 Polish synoptic stations. Mean error (ME) and root mean square error (RMSE) were calculated using 12 forecast range (every 6 hours) for a 72 hour forecast starting at 00 UTC. The error estimators were calculated for all stations and for the whole country area.
0 10 20 30 40 500
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
LOCATION OF SYNOPTIC STATIONS
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 5 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
RMSE, ME, Temperature 2m[C], January-June 2005
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72
forecast range [h]
ME
RM
SE
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN I II III IV V VI
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 6 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
RMSE, ME, Dew point temp. 2m [C], January-June 2005
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72
forecast range [h]
ME
R
MS
E
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN I II III IV V VI
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 7 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
RMSE, ME, Pressure [hPa], January-June 2005
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72
forecast range [h]
ME
R
MS
E
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN I II III IV V VI
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 8 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
RMSE, ME, Wind speed, [m/s], January-June 2005
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72
forecast range [h]
ME
R
MS
E
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN I II III IV V VI
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 9 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
ME, 1-day, Temperature [C], January-June 2005
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
hours/months
ME
ME, 1-day, Dew point temperature [C], January-June 2005.
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
hours/months
ME
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 10 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
ME, 1-day, Pressure [hPa], January-June 2005
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
hours/months
ME
ME, 1-day, Wind speed [m/s], January-June 2005
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
hours/months
ME
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 11 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
ME, Temperature 2m [C], 36h-forecast, June 2005.
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53
synoptic stations
ME
ME, Dew point temp.2m [C], 36h forecast, June 2005
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52
synoptic stations
ME
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 12 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
ME, Pressure [hPa], 36h-forecast, June 2005
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53
synoptic stations
ME
ME. Wind speed [m/s], 36-h forecast, June 2005
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53
synoptic stations
ME
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 13 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
1. The 2 m temperature:
• A monthly and seasonal variation for the scores of temperature is observed.
• The mean error is negative in the winter and positive in spring and the summer.
• In the summer we observed the large diurnal amplitude of mean error and amplitude of RMSE with maximum value during a day.
2. The dew point temperature:
• The monthly variation of mean error is observed.The bias is negative in January, positive in the summer and diurnal amplitude in the spring.
• The RMSE increased with the forecast time.
Conclusions
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 14 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
3. The sea level pressure:
• The RMSE increased with the forecast time.
• The error is smaller in the summer and higher in the winter.
• The ME is quite smooth (about zero in the winter and negative in the summer).
4. The 10 m wind speed:
• The ME is mostly positive and increases with the forecast time.
• The RMSE is quite smooth, bigger in the winter than the summer (with daily amplitude in the summer).
Conclusions
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 15 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Verification of precipitation using 308 rain gauges
Katarzyna Starosta, Joanna Linkowska
Institute of Meteorology and Water Management
Poland
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 16 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
The results of verification of 24-h accumulated precipitation from January 2004 to June 2005are presented below.
For precipitation we calculated indices from the contingency table for 24-h accumulated forecast data and data from 308 rain gauge stations for 3 day forecast range (1-day, 2-day, 3-day). For verification of precipitation following thresholds of 0.5, 1, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 25, 30 mm were used.
For each threshold the following scores were calculated: FBI (Frequency bias index), POD (Probability of detection of event), PON (Probability of detection of non-event), FAR (False alarm rate), TSS (True skill statistics), HSS (Heidke skill score), ETS (Equitable skill score).
0 10 20 30 40 500
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
LOCATION OF RAIN GAUGE STATIONS
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 17 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 18 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
0.5 1 2.5 5 10 15 20 250
20
40
60
80
100%
Indices for 24h accumulated precipitation, May 2004
0.5 1 2.5 5 10 15 20 250
20
40
60
80
100
%
PODPONFARHSSETS
0.5 1 2.5 5 10 15 20 250
20
40
60
80
100
%
THRESHOLDS [mm]
I day
II day
III day
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 19 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
0.5 1 2.5 5 10 15 20 25 300
20
40
60
80
100%
Indices for 24h accumulated precipitation, May 2005
0.5 1 2.5 5 10 15 20 25 300
20
40
60
80
100
%
PODPONFARHSSETS
0.5 1 2.5 5 10 15 20 25 300
20
40
60
80
100
%
THRESHOLDS [mm]
I day
II day
III day
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 20 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
FREQUENCY BIAS INDEX, JANUARY - DECEMBER 2004
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3F
BI
THRESHOLD 0.5 [mm]
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC0
12345678
THRESHOLD 10 [mm]
FB
I
MONTHS
I dayII dayIII day
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 21 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
FREQUENCY BIAS INDEX, JANUARY - JUNE 2005
JAN FEB MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3F
BI
THRESHOLD 0.5 [ mm]
JAN FEB MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
FB
I
MONTHS
THRESHOLD 10 [ mm]
I dayII dayIII day
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 22 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC0
20
40
60
80
100%
THRESHOLD 0.5 [ mm]
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC0
20
40
60
80
100
%
PODPONFARHSSETS
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC0
20
40
60
80
100
%
MONTHS
INDICES FOR 24h ACCUMULATED PRECIPITATION, JANUARY - DECEMBER 2004
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 23 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC0
20
40
60
80
100%
THRESHOLD 10.0 [ mm]
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC0
20
40
60
80
100
%
PODPONFARHSSETS
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC0
20
40
60
80
100
%
MONTHS
I day
II day
III day
INDICES FOR 24h ACCUMULATED PRECIPITATION, JANUARY - DECEMBER 2004
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 24 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN0
20
4060
80100
%THRESHOLD 0.5 [mm]
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN0
20
40
60
80100
%
PODPONFARHSSETS
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN0
20
40
60
80100
%
MONTHS
I day
II day
III day
INDICES FOR 24h ACCUMULATED PRECIPITATION, JANUARY - JUNE 2005
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 25 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN0
20
4060
80100
%THRESHOLD 10.0 [mm]
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN0
20
40
60
80100
%
PODPONFARHSSETS
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN0
20
40
60
80100
%
MONTHS
I day
II day
III day
INDICES FOR 24h ACCUMULATED PRECIPITATION, JANUARY - JUNE 2005
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 26 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
1. The model overestimates the amount of precipitation.
2. The precipitation forecast quality in the period from January to June in 2005 are better than in 2004.
3. The plots of indices for 24-h accumulated precipitation for threshold 0.5 mm in 2005 show smaller variability than in 2004.
4. The quality of the forecast does not deteriorate significantly in subsequent days of the forecast.
Conclusions
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 27 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Verification of upper-air parameters using 3 TEMP stations.
Andrzej Mazur
Institute of Meteorology and Water Management
Poland
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 28 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Monthly mean ME/RMSE at standard pressure levels (1000, 850, 700, 500, 400, 300, 250 and 200 hPa)...
Subject:
of height, temperature, wind velocity and relative humidity...
at three Polish upper-air stations: Leba, Legionowo, Wroclaw
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 29 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Temperature ME (observed-predicted) - Leba station
Left - year 2003 Right - year 2004
Forecast: +12 hours
Temperature ME (observed-predicted) - Legionowo stationTemperature ME (observed-predicted) - Wroclaw station
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 30 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Wind speed ME (observed-predicted) - Leba stationLeft - year 2003 Right - year 2004
Forecast: +12 hours
Wind speed ME (observed-predicted) - Legionowo stationWind speed ME (observed-predicted) - Wroclaw station
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 31 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Standard level height ME (observed-predicted) - Leba station
Left - year 2003 Right - year 2004
Forecast: +12 hoursForecast: +24 hoursForecast: +36 hoursForecast: +48 hoursForecast: +60 hours
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 32 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
Relative humidity ME (observed-predicted) - Leba station
Left - year 2003 Right - year 2004
Forecast: +12 hoursForecast: +24 hoursForecast: +36 hoursForecast: +48 hoursForecast: +60 hours
Institute of Meteorology and Water ManagementWarsaw, Poland - 33 -
COSMO General MeetingZurich, 2005
•Forecasts are “surprisingly” good as far as temperature and wind speed are concerned (ME about ±1° and ±1m/s, respectively).•Model still seems to be “too wet” (ME about 30%, in extreme case - relative error ~50%).•However, this looks like it improved, comparing results for 2003 with these for 2004•The quality of forecast - which is naturally expected tendency - decreases monotonously with time - especially for relative humidity. For other parameters this tendency is not so clearly seen.
CONCLUSIONS